I do sometimes, but I always try to recognize that this is EXACTLY how someone trying to bring you down wants you to feel. If basically nobody exists any more that practices and advertises a way that avoids the abuse, then the path will truly become dead until something radically changes. Until that moment, and not a moment later. And tricking you into apathy is just a very effective strategy to accelerate that.

I still remember getting into tech, and just constantly expanding my horizon with new tools and tutorials. Without those, I probably never would have gotten there, and would probably just have been like the rest. Knowing such people are out there looking for that spark, I want them to be able to find it too. Some things you must do without being able to know if it’s working or not.

EDIT: Typo

An important feature is that you can basically download (and thus, own) the music you pay for (in many formats too).

I think you might misunderstood what Bandcamp is aiming for here. They’re explicitly trying to still allow it when humans are using it (responsibly) as tools. This is essentially a ban on AI where no human is involved (or not involved enough), where the music produced is focused on quantity over quality (slop). That’s a fine and nuanced distinction for a music distribution platform in my opinion.

I doubt they would just blanket scan all music and ban that which they think is AI (aside from how that’s practically impossible). That’s the kind of thing a lazy big tech company would do. I wouldn’t be surprised if this will just end up being on a report basis, at the very least with human verification once steps like banning would be taken. Because otherwise it would be pretty disastrous for the reasons you mentioned, since it would ban legitimate artists. Not to mention the bar of “substantially AI” would need to be judged by someone.

Ah, no worries, none taken. Have a good one.

Not quite sure what you’re trying to say. The article literally says:

Bandcamp’s policy targets the latter end of that spectrum while leaving room for human artists who incorporate AI tools into a larger creative process.

Which is what I’m applauding and affirming, so I’m not sure what you’re saying I’m saying is opposite to what the article says.

Good on them on recognizing that slop is undesirable and shouldn’t be encouraged, but that a full ban also kills the nuance of creative freedom and creates painful situations where a single AI tool anywhere in the process (even indirectly) gets hard work rejected, which could hamper aspiring creatives in their ability to (start to) get their work out there and (start to) make a living when they are not what (most) people have issue with.